While I do believe that Major is one of the worst coaches to ever grace a sideline, he will not leave us barren of talent by any means. A good coach should be able to win immediately with Braxton, Sullivan, Dorn, Woods, Thorne, Clayton, and Denzel, although this list depends on potential transfers as we’ve all learned.[/quote]While I think there have been coaches a lot worse than Major, that doesn’t mean I think he’s a good coach at this point either. I agree with the rest of your statement, a good coach can win with these guys. I’d add that even if they appear to have some limitations (for now, we’ll see how they develop), Benkovic and Bryan should be solid role players as well, and Lester should be a star if a good coach is helping him to develop his overall game and particularly better shot selection.
The good news is - everybody is back except Cherry. The bad news is - everybody finished below 500. I don’t see much wrong with Majors’ X’s & O’s. I like the fact that he tries to play the game inside out on offense. I’ve never thought effort on the part of his players was the problem. At some point and time you have to wonder if his players are any good. Too many silly turnovers, missed layups and free throws alongside crappy man-to-man defense is inexcusable for a team with formidable experience. And yes I realize he recruited the players so it all comes back on him.
Watching the NCAA tournament shows some of our talent gap. However, I also see our bigs not passing out of doubles, one cutting to the basket exploit the departure of the help defender, and positioning positioning positioning…
Mainly though, I wanna see a defensive team that does not allow a layup line whenever the guards dribble drive.
The inability of our beast mode PF to hit a FT isnt a coaching problem though.
If Clayton could hit anywhere near a respectable percentage of his FTs we would be an okay FT shooting team. Thorne is bad at the line too, but with the amount Clayton shoots he kills our team percentage. Can you blame the coaches because the physical, foul-drawing PF can’t shoot FTs? Yes, you try to coach it, but some guys will never be good there no matter how much practice/coaching they get. Not defending Major because at the end of the day wins and loses fall on him, but just reiterating bball49er’s point that maybe the talent just isn’t what we all think it is.
Also, given our history there is about a 1.8% chance that all of these backcourt players actually make it to campus next fall. There are some obvious candidates for transfers just looking at eligibility and the depth chart, but there are always some extra surprises with this program. I almost expect a projected starter to transfer every year at this point.
Clayton 75%.
Charlotte 22 wins, not 17. PH costed too at the line
[quote=“hootie, post:25, topic:28721”]Clayton 75%.
Charlotte 22 wins, not 17. PH costed too at the line[/quote]did you actually do the math or did you just make 22 up?
I added it all up last year to see how many more ppg he would have averaged and I think it was a little over 1. Pretty sure he missed considerably more shots from the line this year though.
[quote=“hootie, post:25, topic:28721”]Clayton 75%.
Charlotte 22 wins, not 17. PH costed too at the line[/quote] Not very many PFs shoot 75%. I’d have settled for 63%
[quote=“Niner National, post:26, topic:28721”][quote=“hootie, post:25, topic:28721”]Clayton 75%.
Charlotte 22 wins, not 17. PH costed too at the line[/quote]did you actually do the math or did you just make 22 up?
I added it all up last year to see how many more ppg he would have averaged and I think it was a little over 1. Pretty sure he missed considerably more shots from the line this year though.[/quote]
If you decide to do it again, do your best to figure out how many 1 and 1’s he missed on the front end. Ugh.
[quote=“CharSFNiners, post:28, topic:28721”][quote=“Niner National, post:26, topic:28721”][quote=“hootie, post:25, topic:28721”]Clayton 75%.
Charlotte 22 wins, not 17. PH costed too at the line[/quote]did you actually do the math or did you just make 22 up?
I added it all up last year to see how many more ppg he would have averaged and I think it was a little over 1. Pretty sure he missed considerably more shots from the line this year though.[/quote]
If you decide to do it again, do your best to figure out how many 1 and 1’s he missed on the front end. Ugh.[/quote]
Yep, fouling Willie in those situations was pretty much a turnover.
Games in which he shot poorly from the line where we lost by a close margin:
Charleston: 7-11 (not so bad) lost by 1
Davidson: 4-8 lost in overtime
Tulane: 5-9 lost by 1
Marshall: 2-7 lost by 3
UAB: 0-5 lost by 2
This list does not include stats for the front ends of a 1 and 1.
If he shot 70% from the line (i.e., went 3.78/5.4 instead of 2.6/5.4 - again, not accounting for 1 and 1s), then we would have won 4 of the above games and tied UAB- so Clayton’s FTs directly attributed to 4/5 losses. He hits and we’re at the end of a 20+ win season.
How many games did we win close where the other team shot poorly from the line?
ETSU: won by 5, we shot 28/35, they shot 17/24. Clayton and Thorne only took 4 of our free throws.
Michigan: won by 2, we shot 5/8, they shot 18/24.
USC Upstate: won by 5, we shot 17/23, they shot 9/11.
UTEP: won by 5, we shot 15/22, they shot 16/23.
Tulsa: won by 4 (OT), we shot 22/42, they shot 23/32.
UNT: won by 2, we shot 11/19, they shot 13/16.
Marshall: won by 4, we shot 13/21, they shot 8/14.
We shot worse from the line in everygame but ETSU and Marshall (which was bad all around at 57% to 61%), for close wins.
ETSU: won by 5, we shot 28/35, they shot 17/24. Clayton and Thorne only took 4 of our free throws.
Michigan: won by 2, we shot 5/8, they shot 18/24.
USC Upstate: won by 5, we shot 17/23, they shot 9/11.
UTEP: won by 5, we shot 15/22, they shot 16/23.
Tulsa: won by 4 (OT), we shot 22/42, they shot 23/32.
UNT: won by 2, we shot 11/19, they shot 13/16.
Marshall: won by 4, we shot 13/21, 8/14.
We shot worse from the line in everygame but ETSU and Marshall, for close wins.[/quote]
you are fast.
ETSU: won by 5, we shot 28/35, they shot 17/24. Clayton and Thorne only took 4 of our free throws.
Michigan: won by 2, we shot 5/8, they shot 18/24.
USC Upstate: won by 5, we shot 17/23, they shot 9/11.
UTEP: won by 5, we shot 15/22, they shot 16/23.
Tulsa: won by 4 (OT), we shot 22/42, they shot 23/32.
UNT: won by 2, we shot 11/19, they shot 13/16.
Marshall: won by 4, we shot 13/21, 8/14.
We shot worse from the line in everygame but ETSU and Marshall, for close wins.[/quote]
you are fast.[/quote]
Let’s me ignore the work on my desk.
[quote=“NewNiner, post:30, topic:28721”]Games in which he shot poorly from the line where we lost by a close margin:
Charleston: 7-11 (not so bad) lost by 1
Davidson: 4-8 lost in overtime
Tulane: 5-9 lost by 1
Marshall: 2-7 lost by 3
UAB: 0-5 lost by 2
This list does not include stats for the front ends of a 1 and 1.
If he shot 70% from the line (i.e., went 3.78/5.4 instead of 2.6/5.4 - again, not accounting for 1 and 1s), then we would have won 4 of the above games and tied UAB- so Clayton’s FTs directly attributed to 4/5 losses. He hits and we’re at the end of a 20+ win season.[/quote] Sorry, but I hate,hate,hate, hate this kind of stuff. You want an example that doesn’t even involve basketball? Recently after yet another bad job by our baseball bullpen, Hibbs was asked about our relievers
and he replied (twice I might add) “It’s a team game” . Furthermore, pointing out a players weak areas without noting his strong areas is just plain unfair. So go back and count Clayton’s offensive rebounds and figure
how many games he won for us.
Did you ever see some player mess up at game’s end only to have his coach tell media that his team would never even have been in position to win without the efforts of said player? Same deal. You take the bad with
the good.
[quote=“4ever niner, post:35, topic:28721”][quote=“NewNiner, post:30, topic:28721”]Games in which he shot poorly from the line where we lost by a close margin:
Charleston: 7-11 (not so bad) lost by 1
Davidson: 4-8 lost in overtime
Tulane: 5-9 lost by 1
Marshall: 2-7 lost by 3
UAB: 0-5 lost by 2
This list does not include stats for the front ends of a 1 and 1.
If he shot 70% from the line (i.e., went 3.78/5.4 instead of 2.6/5.4 - again, not accounting for 1 and 1s), then we would have won 4 of the above games and tied UAB- so Clayton’s FTs directly attributed to 4/5 losses. He hits and we’re at the end of a 20+ win season.[/quote] Sorry, but I hate,hate,hate, hate this kind of stuff. You want an example that doesn’t even involve basketball? Recently after yet another bad job by our baseball bullpen, Hibbs was asked about our relievers
and he replied (twice I might add) “It’s a team game” . Furthermore, pointing out a players weak areas without noting his strong areas is just plain unfair. So go back and count Clayton’s offensive rebounds and figure
how many games he won for us.
Did you ever see some player mess up at game’s end only to have his coach tell media that his team would never even have been in position to win without the efforts of said player? Same deal. You take the bad with
the good.[/quote]
Make no mistake- I love Clayton and he’s probably my favorite on the current team. My point is that he is a poor ft shooter and, if he was hitting at a 70% clip, we might be talking like Alan Major is awesome. Interesting that something a coach really has no control over can come back to haunt him. Clayton is a beast and has pure raw talent. The larger point is that if the team shot better from the line we’re in a completely different situation- Clayton was just a good example already being discussed. Only so much coaching can be done to improve ft shooting; it’s really on the players.
[quote=“NewNiner, post:36, topic:28721”][quote=“4ever niner, post:35, topic:28721”][quote=“NewNiner, post:30, topic:28721”]Games in which he shot poorly from the line where we lost by a close margin:
Charleston: 7-11 (not so bad) lost by 1
Davidson: 4-8 lost in overtime
Tulane: 5-9 lost by 1
Marshall: 2-7 lost by 3
UAB: 0-5 lost by 2
This list does not include stats for the front ends of a 1 and 1.
If he shot 70% from the line (i.e., went 3.78/5.4 instead of 2.6/5.4 - again, not accounting for 1 and 1s), then we would have won 4 of the above games and tied UAB- so Clayton’s FTs directly attributed to 4/5 losses. He hits and we’re at the end of a 20+ win season.[/quote] Sorry, but I hate,hate,hate, hate this kind of stuff. You want an example that doesn’t even involve basketball? Recently after yet another bad job by our baseball bullpen, Hibbs was asked about our relievers
and he replied (twice I might add) “It’s a team game” . Furthermore, pointing out a players weak areas without noting his strong areas is just plain unfair. So go back and count Clayton’s offensive rebounds and figure
how many games he won for us.
Did you ever see some player mess up at game’s end only to have his coach tell media that his team would never even have been in position to win without the efforts of said player? Same deal. You take the bad with
the good.[/quote]
Make no mistake- I love Clayton and he’s probably my favorite on the current team. My point is that he is a poor ft shooter and, if he was hitting at a 70% clip, we might be talking like Alan Major is awesome. Interesting that something a coach really has no control over can come back to haunt him. Clayton is a beast and has pure raw talent. The larger point is that if the team shot better from the line we’re in a completely different situation- Clayton was just a good example already being discussed. Only so much coaching can be done to improve ft shooting; it’s really on the players.[/quote]
No question this hurts us. We are a force it down low type of team. Our bigs are good if they are allowed room/space to operate. But they often force it when doubled and turn it over, or are fouled -negating their effectiveness. Clayton and Thorne are #1 and #2 respectively on our team in terms of FT attempts. Those two accounted for almost half of our free throw attempts (296 out of our 699 free throws 42.3%). Clayton shoots 49% from the line, Thorne 51%. For some people, its tough to improve in this area, but I hope they continue to work hard. Shooting free throws all day to practice is boring, but hopefully they have plenty of time to do it.
if the ‘wants to’ is there, i believe both these guys have the eye-hand coordination to make it happen! (sarcasm. obviously, they do!)
i hope willie’s mother gets in his face about it this summer. i love to watch him play, all lit up with fun, but i cringe every time he puts his toe on the line!
com’on, mr. clayton! that can be fun too!
I think you’re misreading the stat sheet. Clayton had 166, Thorne had 80. Williams had 130, I’m guessing you read his instead of Thorne’s. It doesn’t negate your point, they are both awful, but Thorne is actually only our 5th most frequent FT shooter (which also says something about his game). The reality is they both need work there, we are about 73% as a team without them, but really with as many fouls as he draws, Clayton improving by 10% next year would do wonders.
I think you’re misreading the stat sheet. Clayton had 166, Thorne had 80. Williams had 130, I’m guessing you read his instead of Thorne’s. It doesn’t negate your point, they are both awful, but Thorne is actually only our 5th most frequent FT shooter (which also says something about his game). The reality is they both need work there, we are about 73% as a team without them, but really with as many fouls as he draws, Clayton improving by 10% next year would do wonders.[/quote]
Oops, you are quite right. Thanks for pointing that out.